Warning: This tool or project is no longer maintained and kept available only for archival purposes. Since GoodRelations and schema.org have evolved significantly in the past years, the current status available on this page is unlikely to function as expected. We take no responsibility for any damage caused by the use of this outdated work, to the extent legally possible.

Due to a lack of resources, we are unable to provide support for this project outside of consulting projects or sponsored research. Please contact us if you can contribute resources to update and enhance these resources.

GoodRelations - The Web Vocabulary for E-Commerce

This is the archive of the goodrelations dicussion list

GoodRelations is a standardized vocabulary for product, price, and company data that can (1) be embedded into existing static and dynamic Web pages and that (2) can be processed by other computers. This increases the visibility of your products and services in the latest generation of search engines, recommender systems, and other novel applications.

[goodrelations] GoodRelations Light

Martin Hepp martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org
Tue May 3 11:33:16 CEST 2011

Hi Giovanni:

The bnode for the price specification cannot be omitted, because the price includes at least the currency and the amount, but also maybe validity, unit, and quantity information.

The company node is needed, because if you omit the gr:offers link from the company to the offer, then you do no longer know whether this is - supply (someone offering it, via gr:offers) or
- demand (someone seeking such an offering, via gr:seeks).

Note that this minimal model is fully compliant with the larger Semantic Web / Linked Data ecosystem, so it does not require any premature optimizations that would break at a larger scale.


On May 3, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Giovanni Tummarello wrote:

> what would be the loss of removing the blanknode and the company node?
> (but i do see the gain!!!!!)
> ultralight?
> Gio :)
> On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Martin Hepp
> <martin.hepp at ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote:
>> Dear all:
>> I tried to visualize the minimal RDF pattern for using GoodRelations in a way compatible with both Google and the Semantic Web at large.
>> Attached, please find the respective illustration.
>> It is meant as a complement to the complete GoodRelations UML diagram.
>> Best wishes
>> Martin Hepp
>> _______________________________________________
>> goodrelations mailing list
>> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org
>> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations
> _______________________________________________
> goodrelations mailing list
> goodrelations at ebusiness-unibw.org
> http://ebusiness-unibw.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/goodrelations

More information about the goodrelations mailing list